Utah Code § 78B-6a § 78B-6a-304
Evidence of private nuisance -- Requirements for controlled substance nuisance.
Operative Text
Evidence of private nuisance -- Requirements for controlled substance nuisance. (1) In an action described in Section 78B-6a-302 or 78B-6a-303, all evidence authorized by law, including evidence of reputation in a community, is admissible to prove the existence of a private nuisance or the elements required for an order of abatement by eviction by a preponderance of the evidence. (2) If the private nuisance is for fumes resulting from the unlawful manufacturing or the unlawful possession or use of a controlled substance that drift into a residential unit a person rents, leases, or owns, from another residential or commercial unit: (a) the plaintiff is not required to show that a person individually possessed, used, or controlled the substance; and (b) it is sufficient if the plaintiff shows that the person jointly participated with one or more persons in the use, possession, or control of a controlled substance with knowledge that the activity was occurring, or the controlled substance is found in a place or under circumstances indicating that the person had the ability and the intent to exercise dominion and control over the controlled substance.
Utah Code Ann. § 78B-6a-304 governs what evidence may be used in private nuisance actions related to residential properties, including those involving controlled substances. Under this provision, courts may consider a broad range of evidence—including a location's community reputation—to establish that a private nuisance exists. When the nuisance involves fumes from the unlawful manufacture, possession, or use of a controlled substance drifting into a rented or owned residential unit, the law relaxes the standard proof requirement: a plaintiff does not need to show that any single individual personally possessed or controlled the substance, but may instead show joint participation or circumstances indicating dominion and control.
Plain English — not legal advice.
Property owners and managers dealing with nuisance conditions on their properties should be aware that § 78B-6a-304 allows a wide evidentiary net in abatement proceedings, including community reputation evidence. When pursuing an order of abatement by eviction under §§ 78B-6a-302 or -303, operators generally document conditions thoroughly—including fume complaints, inspection reports, and any law enforcement activity—because such records can support the preponderance-of-evidence standard. In controlled substance nuisance cases specifically, compliant operators typically maintain records showing the source unit and the nature of the fumes, since individual possession by a named person need not be proven under this section.
General guidance for property managers — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult an attorney for advice on your case.
Under § 78B-6a-304, tenants who are subjected to fumes from the unlawful manufacture or use of controlled substances drifting into their unit from another unit have a recognized basis for a private nuisance claim, and they are not required to identify a single person who individually possessed the substance. Tenants facing such conditions may wish to document the fumes, their source, and any related health or habitability impacts, as this type of evidence is expressly admissible in proceedings under this section. Tenants who believe their rights under Utah's nuisance statutes are implicated may benefit from consulting a tenant-rights organization or legal aid provider familiar with Utah Code Ann. §§ 78B-6a-101 through -405 for general information about available remedies.
General guidance for tenants — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult a tenant-rights organization or attorney for advice on your case.
Generated October 16, 2026 — auto-generated, not yet human-reviewed. See /transparency for methodology.
Effective Timeline
References In
Rules and statutes that cite this regulation